Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

NormalVisual writes "License-plate reading cameras are popping up on utility poles all over St. Lawrence County in upstate New York, but no one is willing to say who they belong to. One camera was found by a utility crew, removed from the pole, and given to the local police. 'Massena Police Chief Timmy Currier said he returned it to the owner, but wouldn't say how he knew who the owner was, nor would he say who he gave it to....(Andrew) McMahon, the superintendent at Massena Electric Department, said one of his crews found a box on one of their poles and took it down because "it was in the electric space," the top tier of wires on the pole above the telephone and cable TV wires, and whoever put it there had taken a chance with electrocution. He said they had never received a request or been informed about its placement.'"

But the liberal minority of the court has expressed a willingness to revisit that law, and the court itself is concerned enough with the implications of modern technology that it has actually ruled against GPS-tracking drug dealers for long periods of time.

Your supreme court agrees you have no expectation of privacy on a public road, now shut the hell up and enjoy your "freedom".

Maybe not. But we still have to right to know where the Hell our tax dollars are going. The police may have the "right" to put up those cameras (and that is debatable) but to deny knowledge of the things, or who or what is monitoring them... well. That simply should not be allowed. Having no expectation of privacy does _not_ mean that anyone can put up a camera on public property.

Your supreme court agrees you have no expectation of privacy on a public road, now shut the hell up and enjoy your "freedom".

My right to privacy does not mean that I have no expectation of accountability - especially in terms of city governance, if the city will not avow of the cameras, then how do I know who to impeach or vote out of office in the next election for misuse of funds?

What is the point of having these cameras, if not to catch speeders and red-light runners? If those two ARE the point of having these cameras, then people would be receiving citations based on photos from these cameras. So the immediate question that comes to my mind is: are people getting these citations, or not?

What is the point of having these cameras, if not to catch speeders and red-light runners? If those two ARE the point of having these cameras, then people would be receiving citations based on photos from these cameras.

My guess would be a three-letter-agency, in the "war on (terror|drugs|communism|whatever)"

Well that's my guess too. I just thought it would be less tin-foil-hatty to rule out the possibility that they are being used for less nefarious purposes. The implication being that three-letter-agencies are nefarious.

Here's the part I like. Thirty years ago we railed on the soviet union for attacking other sovereign governments and forcing their way of government on them, for imprisoning people without rights or due process, and for a long ugly war in Afghanistan where many civilians were killed in a fairly pointless war. Oh, and for taking away civil liberties from their people and suppressing people with the 'wrong ideas' or for practicing religion. This is how we demonized them to support the spending on covert and direct operations and a military build-up that cost trillions.

Today we attack other sovereign nations and force democracy on them, we put people up in Guantanamo Bay, and we've had a long ugly war in Afghanistan where many civilians were killed in a pointless war. We've systematically removed rights from our citizens and given them to the police to suppress wars on drugs, terrorism, or whatever the money-waster flavor of the month is. We suppress people with the wrong ideas, and as a Christian nation that was founded by people fleeing religious persecution, we're rather un-christian-like in our treatment of non christians. Now the muslim extremists demonize us on the same grounds that we demonized the Soviets over.

There was more than one group. I suspect that you are correct about the Puritans, but they aren't the only group. E.g., the Quakers (Society of Friends) settled Pennsylvania, and they weren't interested in discriminating against anyone except the atheists and the agnostics. The Hessian mercenaries just wanted a place they could earn a living. The Oglethorpe colony in Georgia were there because they were sentenced to "Transportation for Life" (as later happened in Australia). Etc. (Sorry, I can't remem

My guess would be a three-letter-agency, in the "war on (terror|drugs|communism|whatever)"

My guess is that it is more commodity than that. What PI wouldn't find the answer to the question "did this car go down this road between these dates" unworthy of a small disbursement from their client's expense account fairly frequently?

It's worth noting that Massena is on the Canadian border. All that separates them from Canada is the St Lawrence River, and there's a bridge a few miles east of downtown. If it is the DEA, perhaps they're watching people fill their prescriptions with cheap canadian generics they can't buy in the U.S.

Massena is also home to a major hydroelectric power dam, three large aluminum plants (two of which are idle) and the Eisenhower lock on the St. Lawrence seaway (any international ships en route to the great lakes have to stop there), so it could be a place of interest for agencies/companies other than the DEA.

Also, there are a lot of over-the-counter meds in the states that require a prescription in Canada. For example, Canadians need a prescription to get Excedrin while Americans just walk into wallgreens and buy it without so much as showing ID.

My guess would be a three-letter-agency, in the "war on (terror|drugs|communism|whatever)"

My guess would agree with you because...

1) If this was a police or city camera, it likely wouldn't have been placed that high up since the lower the camera is, the easier it would be to view the license plate. The higher it is, the greater the viewing angle and the slimmer the image of the plate the harder it becomes for a program to correctly distinguish the important features. Well... this applies to police looking at license plates at least. Automated tickets for running red lights and speeders. I suppose there are possible reasons why the city could have placed them up there and in doing so wanted them as high as possible (I can't think of why they would want them at all but I guess it's possible) but see the reasons below for why I don't think the city would have done this either.

2) If this was a police or city camera, it wouldn't have needed to be placed "in the electric space" on the pole for electricity. The electric space doesn't mean it's the only spot for power on the pole. It means it's reserved for transporting massive amounts of electricity and it's reserved at higher place on the pole so that it doesn't become a hazard to less informed telco and cable company workers. It's dangerous and you don't want anyone near it who isn't fully trained in it. Now a camera doesn't even require a wired connection for communication. We have them all over where I live (Miami and Fort Lauderdale area), you see them all of the time on lights, on the highway, etc, and they all have antennae on them for wireless communications. These cameras can receive power and communicate equally at lower levels (when it's this small level of height difference). The police or city would have no reason or want to place them that high for technical purposes. If the cameras are not wireless equipped or they need a faster connection then what the wireless can provide (high def, high fps over long range wireless from many devices simultaneously) then they would still be in the proper zone for cable or telephone links in that zone. They have everything they need in that zone on the poll.

3) If this were a police or city camera, the power company would have already known, would not have dismounted it and would not have brought it to the police.

4) The police and city would both admit that it belongs to them if it did. It would not be a secret. They have so many bureaucratic policies that they are not allowed to go through some move like that and not inform the public when they did. I remember in a town a grew up in when the police started using cruisers marked as taxis to trick drunk drivers into not thinking it was police, making it easier to follow them without being noticed, etc, I don't remember the details but it was in the paper with a statement from the police about it. Government, at least at these basic levels, are not allowed to keep any secrets. They are required to inform the public (if your city has cameras, try it, ask the police and they will tell you it's theirs).

5) The police and city don't install cameras! They don't have a camera installation department. They don't want or need one. They contract this out. This is a one time roll out. They install the cameras and then they are installed. They wouldn't have a pre-existing camera installation department and if they know that they will have no practical use once the cameras are installed then they wouldn't create this department just to have to disband it soon thereafter. They contract this out to qualified individuals who are familiar with these polls and understand what zones it's allowed to be mounted in.

6) A properly done installation will leave details of the installation at the location. What I mean is these boxes that are mounted on the polls will say something like "Property of Comcast Cable, for problems call 1-800-555-7264" or something like that. It serves to notify people on the pole who

It isn't. For one, drops to houses are 220V three phase, the house splits that into two 110V circuits. For another, that's the voltage that comes out of the "pole pigs", the trash-can sized cylindrical transformers which supply power to several adjacent houses. Transmission voltage between poles is going to be at least 440 V, and often higher.

DEA has had license plate reading cameras on U.S. highways for a while. In particular they record every car on some routes in California, Texas, Arizona and recently Utah [msn.com] using ELSAG cameras though they usually make no attempt to hide them [checkpointusa.org].

They analyze the data looking for people transporting drugs from the Mexican border among other things. Maybe they are just expanding the program to watch the traffic along the northern border too.

So, yea welcome to the big brother police state, we've been in it a while now. Say cheese!!

In the UK, when you fill up with petrol a camera will read and record your number plates. If it can't get a clear shot of both your number plate and your face, the pump won't activate. It's to deter petrol thievery (which is a very common crime at self service petrol stations). So said paint wouldn't be a goer for your average driver.

I know the UK is about 20 miles further down the Orwellian road than the US, but just thought it was worth mentioning.

There is no radar element to these devices so they cannot be used for speed or movement checking. They are obviously for spying on the population and not for law enforcement. Number plate recognition used over a large grid like this is for tracking your movements over your lifetime. They will know where everyone is at every moment of the day.

Code dictates 40 inches distance from the bottom of the electric facilities. Telephone and cable wires need to be attached to the pole below that space. Code compliance is a major pain, but something like this probably sticks out like a sore thumb, so it was easily spotted by utility crews.

This is such a big box that doesn't look very covert to me. In southern AZ, we have different federal agencies and their cameras. Usually, they're really discreet and don't look like much at all. This seems like over

You're assuming that they weren't clandestinely placed by a clandestine three-alphabet-letter government agency.

If this sort of shit keeps up, I wouldn't be surprised if certain people start destroying ALL public cameras on general principles -- and I wouldn't blame anyone who did. George Orwell must be spinning in his grave about now and/or laughing riotously, wherever he might be, because He Told Us So and we apparently didn't listen.

It would be interesting if the next time the power company finds one, they keep it and inform the police department that the "rightful" owner may come by anytime to claim it and pay for the removal expense.

I'm not as worried about the existence of the cameras as I am that lots of people seem to know whose they are and no one's telling. That's kind of the antithesis of government transparency. I hope someone sues under FOIA.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, FOIA is a federal law that provides for the exposure of federal information. I don't think anyone can file a FOIA request with the state of New York or any of its counties or cities.

Thanks for the input. It got me curious, so I checked to see if Texas has a FOIA as well. It turns out we do: The Texas Public Information Act. According to at least one website the TPIA is even stronger than the FOIA.

More important your name will be added to a list of names of people to watch very closely and now that you have gained nearly no information, they will be spending their learning a whole lot about you.

Not agreeing or disagreeing with your point, but since Mitt isn't going to be any better, according to you, why are you focusing on Obama? Agreed that he is president, but implicit in your statement is an admission that the problem is bigger than Obama.

And voting for Romney with the expectation that he wouldn't be any better, i.e. worse, would be what?

It would be sending a message to politicians: perform or be thrown out. No consideration for party, no consideration for platform, no consideration for being a nice guy, etc. Pure performance.

Politicians will not change their behavior until they fear for their jobs. As long as voters are loyal to political parties, platforms, etc things will not change. Politicians need to feel that there is no base they can rely upon.

Also consider that if you are loyal to a party or platform you are essentially irrelevant. One side can count on your vote and the other side can do nothing to get your vote. Both can ignore you (in their actions, they will probably say the right thing in speeches) with no real negative consequences.

Generally speaking, that's a reasonable position. The twist is that the US system is designed for consultation and compromise. So the Republicans want one thing, the Dems the other and they're suppose to split the difference.

What the Republicans have discovered is that compromises tend to make the President look good. So they've stopped compromising. Mitch McConnell has been pretty explicit about this: he will only sign off on a Dem proposal if it's something, "...I and my members would do anyway..." http [washingtonpost.com]

Politicians will not change their behavior until they fear for their jobs. As long as voters are loyal to political parties, platforms, etc things will not change. Politicians need to feel that there is no base they can rely upon.

But politicians already do fear for their jobs and they do change their behavior accordingly.

The problem is that the people who have the most influence over the politicians job-keeping potential are not the voters. The people with the real influence are those that make the campaign contributions and the people who manipulate the media image of the politicians.

The media isn't run by the government; the government is run by the MEDIA. How is this not obvious? Democracy has already been subverted, what you hav

Politics suck. We either get the known failure of Obama, or the guy promising to be a bigger failure. Sadly, I think people will vote for the candidate promising to be a failure. At least there's a chance he'll fail at that and accidentally do something good.

Both the efforts to get Osama and the banking reform passed were in the works before Obama was even nominated. Keep your eye on the ball. No administration starts from scratch.

As for ObamaCare? Seriously? ObamaCare is nothing more than a bailout for "big pharma" in the guise of a social program for Joe Sixpack. I know this, I work for big pharma and the CEO of my little slice of the healthcare pie didn't even try to hide how pleased he was with the outcome of the legislation. Oh, our stock is also at an al

You shouldn't get all worked up about Obama being "flexible" after the elections. The Russians are upset about the missile shield (not really, they're just using it as leverage as a bargaining chip) and are trying to pressure the USA about it. Obama deflected this by saying "I agree, but these crazy republicans! I need their votes! It will be different after I get their votes."

ie, he was using the Republicans pressuring him as leverage to pressure the Russians. He's not actually flexible on the idea, a

My first thought was that the Black Chamber might be implementing their own version of SCORPION STARE, but then it occurred to me that they wouldn't be this incompetent about it. So maybe there's some other party involved- it is still possible that these are loaded with basilisk technology.

Could be that someone wants us to think that Black Chamber is implementing SCORPION STARE. Or it could just be trials. Regardless, someone is apparently worried about CASE NIGHTMARE GREEN [pjmedia.com].

Destruction of public property, vandalism, etc. These are the charges I WOULD have been concerned about 15 years ago. Now, I'd have to worry that following your suggestion would lead to some type of retarded terrorism charges. I'd hate to start smashing and see that the people that come calling are the NSA or Homeland Security.

Another idea: Either these things are network connected, or they aren't. If they aren't they must be storing the pictures and someone has to come around frequently to download the information. If they are connected to a network, I'm sure some leet haxor wouldn't mind wasting a few hours trying to track some IP addresses and whatnot (not that I'm recommending it or anything).

Yeah, but you can get in trouble for shooting guns in public....how about some of those extremely high powered lasers you can buy off the internet...I'd have to guess a blast of one of those would burn out any sensors on the cameras beyond repair.

Yeah, but you can get in trouble for shooting guns in public....how about some of those extremely high powered lasers you can buy off the internet...I'd have to guess a blast of one of those would burn out any sensors on the cameras beyond repair.

I'm Australian so I don't have first hand experience with the laws in America, but was under the assumption that firing a gun in a public place wasn't really a big deal, but shining a laser at something was an act of terrorism and you'd be in big trouble.

I don't think pointing your own gun or laser at a fascist CAMERA is a very smart thing to do. It might be transmitting in real time. Hell, it's not even smart to recommend it. I certainly don't. It is easy, however, to imagine other ways - strictly as a mental exercise.

Right now the fascists are in hog heaven because they have a monopoly on drones. However, it's pretty easy for citizens and bands of citizens to manufacture their own drones [hexacopters.com] at a cost of 1% or 0.1%, maybe 0.01% of what those morons pay for th

Some spray paint works equally well. For deniability, dip a rag in dirty water and just smear the lens. Then just wait to see who comes to fix it. For added fun, set up your own counter-camera nearby to monitor the first camera repair.

File an official request demanding that they release any pertinent information related to the owner/operator of those cameras. There is no legal basis for them to deny you that information (operational security or an active investigation).

These camera units have to have some sort of clue about their owner(unless they are configured in the not-so-terribly-useful 'record only to local storage, somebody climbs up when it is time to collect" mode). Are they connected to fixed wiring? Do they have a data radio of some flavor? WiFi? Cellular? Any SIM card to be pulled? Serial numbers, vendor information, dates of manufacture, etc, etc.

Unless somebody went to considerable trouble to do this in some deep-black-ops kind of way, they should leak clues like a sieve once somebody just gives the cops the finger and takes one apart...

Looks like a standard cellular antenna on top in the photo, so very likely a SIM card. Serial number on the camera and processor. And very likely a sticker in the cabinet that says "If found please Return to DHS. And keep your mouth shut Or Else". Although wouldnt surprise me if the phone was already ringing on the Captains desk when the box showed up.

A pinhole in a non-obvious device could conceal a laser until the kill, and a conventional laser weapon sight could be boresighted beforehand to assist aiming. Put a camera behind the laser sight, and you could aim it remotely....

A pinhole in a non-obvious device could conceal a laser until the kill, and a conventional laser weapon sight could be boresighted beforehand to assist aiming. Put a camera behind the laser sight, and you could aim it remotely....

You know..if you could rig this up with some auto tracking and aiming gear....I'd be VERY interested in this...to blow out all traffic cameras in the area around here....

I live in Watertown, which is in the county south of St. Lawrence. Our local online newswank (newzjunky.com) has a few stories confirming this--federal grants funding license plate readers used by law enforcement for various and sundry tracking tasks, including mapping drug runners and catching local burglars.

It's the DEA. Doing the same thing outside of California. Logging traffic to find patterns of drug runners across the border.

ANPR seems like a huge violation of both the right to travel freely and the right to be free of unreasonable searches. We've gone from a model where license plates were used after the fact of a crime to where they are used when there is absolutely no suspicion of wrong-doing. That's not the bargain we signed up for when license plates were first made mandatory.

...you're risking the security of the country. Americans can't handle the truth, and the less they know about the dark side of terrorism or the drug trade flowing into the US, the better. It's easier to deal with in obscurity than with the partisan press making it hard for the security of our country to be kept up.

(I kid, but the sad part is that there are some out there that would actually agree with that sentiment 100%...)

Homeland Security agressively patrols that area since it borders Canada and has a international crossing at Cornwall.
I've been stopped at road blocks hosted jointly by NYS Police & Homeland Security. The State Police stayed in the background while my car was singled out by Homeland Security for a walk-around sniff by their dog and an uncomfortable amount of questioning. I'm an old Unix admin who does not resemble a terrorist in the slightest.
Also worth noting that that St. Regis Native American Reservation sits on both sides of the border there. Perhaps someone is trying to keep tabs on them??

Homeland Security agressively patrols that area since it borders Canada and has a international crossing at Cornwall. I've been stopped at road blocks hosted jointly by NYS Police & Homeland Security. The State Police stayed in the background while my car was singled out by Homeland Security for a walk-around sniff by their dog and an uncomfortable amount of questioning. I'm an old Unix admin who does not resemble a terrorist in the slightest. Also worth noting that that St. Regis Native American Reserv

shoot em with a painball gun, just hit the lens, paintball wont cause permanent damage but it would force the owners to send out a crew to clean them, do it enough times and the cameras are no longer cost effective to the ticket happy privateers

This is just what they catch, and they aren't looking too closely, or haven't in the past. Very quiet there. I'm very familiar with the area and it has always been a smugglers paradise, prohibition til now. A lot of old Victorian houses up there have secret hidden rooms. If you ask the homeowner why they are there, they usually claim for the underground railroad. BS, these houses were built after the civil war, and most in the 1920's. Huge fortunes were made moving booze.

Everyone there knows what's going on. My best estimate is that 50% of the imported drugs on the east cost come in to the country from there.

There was also a huge case in the late 90's where a 1-2 billion dollar a year cigarette smuggling ring (moving the cigs north, into canada) was broken up. Phillip Morris had several execs indited.

Big business.

My guess on the agency, in order of likelihood.

DEAATFBorder PatrolFBIDHS (using parts of the above)Canada, with support from any of the above.

To be fair, if the data is being collected by scientists conducting a study, I find it diffictult to determine whose rights are being violated. If the data is not being used by law enforcement, then I would say that scientists have a right to take pictures of passing cars (if they have permission to install the cameras of course).

In response to Twain, how will we ever transition away from being fools unless we practice speaking out, are willing to make mistakes and then learn from them? Pithy witticisms like this are all very well for a little amusement but I sometimes worry that people take them seriously.

Albert Einstein gave us some good quotes. Ever heard this one? "The world we have made, as a result of the level of thinking we have done thus far, creates problems we cannot solve at the same level of thinking at which we created them."

"The only way to avoid being racist is to simply treat everyone by the same fair and equitable standard."

If everyone were willing to abide by that policy, all would be well and good. The problems occurs when they don't.

It's not that you're giving special favors to someone based on race. Or gender. Or religion. Or sexual orientation. It's that you're ensuring that anyone, regardless of those factors, has the same rights and access to the same opportunities as everyone else.

No, by _definition_ "conservative" means you want to maintain the status quo and believe that changes to it should be made slowly and gradually. If you want a good antonym, try "radical".

That's what the word means. You either use the word correctly, use a different word if you mean something different, or you're wrong. I don't subscribe to this "but but languages evolve!" nonsense, at least not when it's used to defend stupidity. We live in an age where kids are made to play soccer games without keep